Samsung seeks details of Apple's HTC patent settlement

In an effort to stop Apple from imposing a sales ban on their products in the U.S., Samsung is seeking to have Apple disclose the terms of their patent settlement with HTC. The grounds for the court request are that the patents in question may be related to those that Apple had claimed were infringed upon by Samsung - in particular, user experience patents which Apple had previously refused to license to anyone. If they turned around and licensed these patents to HTC, Apple will have a hard time convincing courts that the $1 billion in compensation isn't enough to keep them happy.

It's great to see that Apple may be put in a position where they have to license their more ridiculous patents more freely, but one still has to wonder what made Apple ease up and accept a settlement with HTC in the first place. Any ideas? Maybe Tim Cook wants to relax Apple's image a bit, or maybe just save on legal fees?

Apple already licenses their technology and Samsung actually turned down a deal prior to the outset of all the litigation. That is one of the convenient things some people seem to want to ignore. It is Google, Motorola, and Samsung that have refused to accept the reality that if you use someone else's patented technology, you are either going to pay royalties or reach some sort of cross-licensing deal such as the ones Apple has with Microsoft. The fact of life is most companies pay some sort of royalties to Apple and everyone pays some royalties to Microsoft (and usually Nokia). BTW, Apple is going to be under no obligation to offer Samsung the same deal as HTC simply because HTC reached an agreement without going to litigation whereas Samsung took it to court and lost. Samsung is also guilty of more than not paying royalties, they were accused of copying designs (and lost a jury verdict)....

First off, the patent deal turned down by Samsung, Moto, and Google were outrageously high and most of those patents that apple wanted to license were already in dispute. You seem to ignore that. You are correct that everyone cross-licenses with each other and that is the way they do business. But I would like you to tell me....how the HELL do you know for a fact beyond the shadow of a doubt that Samsung is using Apple's technology? You don't. And no, Apple does not have to offer Samsung the same kind of deal. Samsung is just setting up the fact that they (Apple) are willing to license it's patents at a fair price...to a company that is no threat to Apple's bottom line and market share proving that Apple is biased against Samsung. AND let's not forget, .....That it's been proven that the jury was tainted by a biased jury foreman...by his and other jury members admissions. That's why Judge Lucy Koh agreed to hear arguments on this matter. Besides...you show me a Samsung phone that looks exactly like an iphone...(hieght, width, length, depth, internal specs, screen rez, etc.) and I'll show you ocean front property in Colorado. Just curious....are you at the wrong site? iMore is just around the corner waiting for you.

Only when they say Samsung has clearly copied apple without fact's to back it up. Yup, apple is suing and has won a few...but lost a few as well. This doesn't mean Samsung has copied or (stolen) squat.

Last I checked this will likely be heading for a new hearing due to bias from the jury foreman. Remember as well that one of the critical patents in the hearing was later invalidated by the USPO. Apple wants to license patents at outrageous sums...when the patents in question should never have been issued in the first place. I'm all for compensation for innovation, but last I checked Apple hasn't come up with anything that's not an incremental improvement or a copy of someone else in a while.

"guilty" is a strong word to throw around these days as it relates to Samsung and Apple. How many other countries have found Samsung innocent in court? The system in the US is bunk. Still, I see your point about licensing and royalties. But, if you're going to suggest we should all shake our fingers at them for not paying up, you have to explain how they are wrong to not do so. If the cost was unreasonable and Samsung decided to take their chances in court instead, who is to blame them?

AApple is accusing Samsung of infringing on design patents (which are obvious, have prior art and absurd).
Samsung, on the other hand, is accusing Apple of using patented technology and refusing to pay FRAND licenses on it.
Here's a little quiz. Have you ever bought a phone with the fact that it was rectangular with rounded corners as a principle factor? Alternately, have you ever bought a phone with the consideration that it has 3G technology as a primary factor?
Answer those questions, then tell us who's stealing whose tech here?

Yeah they lost a jury verdict. A jury mind you that was allegedly improperly influenced by the jury foreman, and also ignored the judges instructions. A jury foreman who's actions in the case are now being looked into. Let's not also forget that some of the patents that Apple sued over should never have been granted on the basis of prior art, which again the jury ignored. The patent system in the U.S. is broken. Funny that in similar cases all over the world, Apple has lost cases on the patents that they sued for here. Guess "home court" advantage does pay off from time to time.

I think Apple has hit a brick wall with iOS and needs patents to...ahem...innovate since they can't seen to do it themselves. Obtaining patents by HTC clearly extends iOS's life by being able to add pieces parts of HTC tech designed for android into thier mobile community. HTC on the other hand, is getting it's butt whooped by Samsung, and a few others as well, in the mobile market and also is in need of a new direction to compete and up thier market share. By doing this, gives both companies a way to co-mingle thier tech together without fear of litigation.

Apple and Samsung need to just come to some sort of agreement. This patent litigation crap is starting to get old. I understand that there are legitimate arguments on both sides as to whether Samsung copied Apple or not; but in the end, litigation will start to have a negative effect on both companies. Period. And as long as both companies have to work around each others' patents, the mobile industry will begin to stagnate and we will see the same products year after year. I'm hoping they can settle on some sort of agreement soon. And let's be grown-up here: there's no reason to tell someone to go to iMore or label them an iSheep simply because you disagree with their opinion. Just my $.02.

I didn't label him an "isheep" or any other name for that matter. I simply asked a question and stated imore was just around the corner. And let's be grown-up here: Don't put words into peoples typing especially when it wasn't typed.

He wasn't stating an opinion. He was trying to state fact in which he believes. But those statements he made were and are simply misconjecture of the truth. Opinions usually start with "I feel that", "I think that", "my opinion is", etc. Just my fitty cent.

No need to get defensive. My comment was not targeting you. I was speaking in general, and that's coming from someone that used to call people iSheep and tell them to go back to iMore. If I were targeting you, I would have replied directly to your first post, which I didn't. You're getting worked up for no reason. At the end of the day, it's just a website =)

And that's subjective. I'm an Operations Specialist in the Coast Guard. I used to be a crewman on the small boats that got dispatched to save mariners that were taking on water, run aground, etc. But now, I work in a radio room. My job is similar to that of an emergency dispatcher. So, I can understand why you would put "saving lives" in quotation marks. I think I have had an impact on people's lives. When someone first gets into trouble, I'm the first person they talk to. If I don't do my job, then the medics, emt's, doctors, and/or nurses can't do their jobs. Not trying to throw my military service in your face or anyone else's, but why attack me? Do you have that much disdain towards people that don't agree with your opinion or your agenda? You have to live with yourself, I don't. And I'm not drunk anymore. If you still feel the need to attack me, then that's on you. But, I have nothing against you. We can always just agree to disagree.

We're not the same person. I agree, that would be pathetic. It's all good, though. I understand why you guys would call bs. We're all fans of Android. I don't get it, though. Do you guys have something against me? What's the point in bashing someone for commenting on an article? I guess I forgot where I was. If I'm not an Android fanboy, I'm automatically 12, I'm a duplicate account, or I'm not owning up to my words. You guys know how ridiculous that sounds? Feel free to have the last word because this is stupid.

Who isn't much smarter when they're sober? lol I can't believe you're taking this so personal. Have you never heard of anyone speaking in general? Sure, his post may have influenced what I said. However, I was not targeting him. He has the right to have an opinion, as much as you and I do. Let's be real about this. If I'm being disrespectful in any way, I apologize, to you and everyone that commented on this article.

+9000 for acting like an adult in the face of constant internet anonymity. Either way, I'm gonna have to agree with MERCDROID. It's just a site, the dude is drunk and he's basically just saying that he didn't mean to offend if he did (which I didn't notice).

Back to the actual article: I would be pretty happy if Samsung and Apple just settled and made a 10 year truce too. Apple hasn't really innovated lately (minus creativity on obtaining prior use patents/ patents for broad ideas rather than a specific implementation) and honestly, I would like the whole banning thing to stop. I had to wait a little longer for my EVO LTE (wish I just got a Note 2) when it was temporarily banned in the US because they "infringed" on a stupid common sense patent where the item was removed with their new version of Sense UI.

+9000 I think patent litigation is a double-edged sword. Apple is the most litigious company in the mobile market, so in turn, they base all of their new ideas off of broad ideas of patents. I believe they're actually paranoid about implementing "specific" new ideas because they don't want to become the product of the litigation that they've initiated.

Samsung is no saint either, though. If one party is not willing to spearhead a settlement and/or is uncomfortable in doing so, then the other party should be willing to "be the better man" and address the concerns of the other party instead of digging their feet in. At least with HTC's settlement, we won't have to worry about their products being held up in Customs anymore. And they won't have to work around stupid common sense patents anymore. I'm hoping that HTC rebounds and becomes a formidable force in 2013.

One also has to wonder if the person Dave mentioned in the above commercial owned an Android or iPhone device in addition to the truck that is mentioned.

Personally I think the Apple/HTC settlement has absolutely nothing to do with Apple "relaxing their image a bit". For both these companies it is all about business and the bottom line. Nothing more, nothing less. One has to think that both companies are getting something out of this deal. Time will tell how the patent wars will turn out. Hopefully, consumers and technological advances will not be victims of a post apocalyptic patent world.

Twinkies are only surviving for the moment because of surplus. But as they dwindle and not being manufactured (baked), they will vanish....UNLESS the rights are bought by another company and that company continues to bake and market them. Otherwise, no more Twinkies but the latter ismore likely. It's a Sad day in America though and you can thank the UNIONS for thier utter stupidity.

Exactly. It's all about the moolah and market dominance, not love affairs. LIke you said both companies have something to gain from this and time will tell what that is.

Portions of this page are modifications based on work created and shared by the Android Open Source Project
and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 2.5 Attribution License. AndroidCentral is an independent site
that is not affiliated with or endorsed by Google.